This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: G++ defining _GNU_SOURCE

To: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>
Subject: Re: G++ defining _GNU_SOURCE
From: Jason Merrill <jason_merrill at redhat dot com>
Date: 11 Jun 2001 18:18:03 +0100
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010608173954.A3346@redhat.com><20010607173644.A964@disaster.jaj.com><20010607155922U.mitchell@codesourcery.com><20010607180513.A1337@disaster.jaj.com><20010607163035K.mitchell@codesourcery.com><20010607183915.A1626@disaster.jaj.com><20010608173954.A3346@redhat.com><5.1.0.14.2.20010611121034.03371c18@mail.lauterbach.com>

>>>>> "Franz" == Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes:

> At 13:58 10.06.2001, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> >         * config/alpha/linux.h (CPLUSPLUS_CPP_SPEC): New.
>> 
>> Won't the config/linux.h definition suffice?

> Nearly no linux platform uses this file since it's too x86
> specific. Actually I believe not even most of the *_SPEC defines belong in
> there, they differ too much across all the linux targets.

Ah.  That seems like a bug, but I suppose not worth dealing with right now.

Jason

References:
- Re: G++ defining _GNU_SOURCE
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: G++ defining _GNU_SOURCE
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: G++ defining _GNU_SOURCE
  - From: Franz Sirl

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]